Scotus considering trans vs non-trans sports competition today

[hntnhole]

POLL:

 

SCOTUS considering the issue of trans athletes in public school intramural competitions today.  What they eventually decide may become the standard for a generation or three regarding sports competitions.    

 

This issue presents a number of questions regarding fair treatment of trans athletes.  While it’s reasonable to want all competitors to receive the same chances as every other competitor, how do we, as a nation aspiring to supporting  equal rights for all, manage to deal with this conundrum?  

 

Can it be “equal” competition if one competitor is biologically female, and another is biologically male?  Does society need to “adjust” for the inherent inequality between competitors of non-like biological make-up?  Can that even be accomplished fairly? Should some contrivance such as formula adjusting for the biological inequity be invented?    

 

While sexual orientation is a complex issue, surely a gay orientation shouldn’t prevent one from competitive sports.  How would the issue of medically “becoming” the opposite sex assigned at birth impact the issue of competitive sports?  Should some contrivance be engineered to compensate for the inherent inequality of trans competitors vs non-trans competitors?  How important is it for trans competitors to compete with non-trans competitors?   Is it even possible to “adjust” for the inherent inequality in physical strength?  

 

I’m sure we all want to be inclusive to the greatest possible extent.  Equal rights for all is a battle we’ve been fighting for decades; we don’t want to regress, but we do want to give everyone an equal chance at achieving their potential, whatever that may entail.  

 

How stands the (80K+) Crowns?

[viking8x6]

Seems to me that proper consideration of the issue would necessitate discussion of (and perhaps agreement upon) what is the purpose of competition in public school sports?

 

[Rillion]

I think that we can have different rules between reactional level sports and elite competition oriented sports. From the info I found from the NCAA, there are approximately 530k college athletes yet there are 8 million high school athletes. So only 6.7% of high school athletes go on to be college athletes. And only 0.02% of high school athletes become professional athletes. 

The focus of primary school athletic programs should be fun and character building focused. That can include trans individuals. When you start moving up to more elite competition I think it becomes a tougher question. 

In college for example most collegiate athletes careers end at college. Yet the national finals of many sports could be considered elite level competitions. 

It's a tough issue and one that actually impacts very few people either way. For example, one of the cases being heard by the court comes out of West Virginia where there is only one trans student that wants to compete in the state. 

[PozBearWI]

Not exactly a POLL, but I'm fine with putting out my own thoughts; understanding that this is a discussion and not THE conclusive moral direction.  

I think society benefits if boys and girls growing up play sports together.  For many who live in small towns/rural locations gender isn't a viable choice to make.  If we have six friends, some boys, some girls we have to play together to have a game.  

When we get into income producing sports; this topic might be more relevant. Then too let's consider Billy Jean King and Bobby Riggs.  Bobby claimed all along he was the obvious winner due to his penis and masculine genetics.  And yet... 

 

[Rillion]

I've read a lot about that match, not sure it really settled much with all the rumors of Bobby Riggs being in debt to the mob due to gambling losses. Let's just say perhaps Bobby Riggs was aptly named. 

Edited Tuesday at 07:31 PM by Rillion

[Guest STS]

Within the tennis community there are various levels of competition and different governing bodies. Within the USA the governing body is the USTA. Back in the 1970's the first, and only, trans professional tennis player, Renee Richards, took the USTA to court and won her right to play in the women's draw of the US Open, the highest level of elite competition in the USA. Subsequently the USTA established rules regarding trans players within tennis. The USTA acknowledged that there are varying levels of competition with this being split into amateur (recreational) and professional (elite) categories. The USTA rules for recreational play said that any person who identifies as female can play as female, they just took people's word for it. If a transwoman wanted to play in elite level then they had to have been on hormone therapy for 2 years and have had some form of gender affirming surgery. I would like to just center on the amateur playing side of things as this is what I have personal experience of. When someone joins the USTA wanting to play in a recreational league or tournament each member with have their own rating. This rating reflects their level of skill. Level 1 being someone who has only just started to play going up to level 7 which would be professional. Most D1 college players would fall between 5.0 and 7.0. This rating system makes it so that you only play others of a similar skill level thus taking any genetic factors out of the equation.

Unfortunately, after Trump signed his executive orders, the USTA in 2025 decided to acquiesce to him by removing their previous guidelines regarding transgender players thus forcing transwomen to have to play against men. This is not offering equal opportunity to transwomen.

 

I personally have been on hormone treatment for over 4 years and I have had gender affirming surgeries. My hormone levels are now, and have been for a significant time, within the "normal" range for cisgender women. Also, during that time I have noticed a significant reduction of muscle mass. There possibly should be discussion on a case by case basis, but at the end of it all the laws of the land should always be constitutional... what this administration is doing is not constitutional and I just hope that the damage done by them will be reversible once they are out of office. 

[hntnhole]

Thanks, Guest STS, for that most informative addition to the subject.  Clearly, you're well-aware of the issue, and I appreciate your commentary.

[Erik62]

I am certainly not transphobic. I am however, phobic about groups who espouse intimidation & violence to make their point. As young children out of school we did not segregate however, at school we were segregated into "genders" in the interests of fair play. An easy solution to this socially destructive dilemma is to simply expand sports events into: Male, Female & transgender. Cost will be an irrelevancy when we take into consideration the gross waste of money that is spent by government and all relevant organisations that will be involved. This has to be sorted as it has caused to much angst within community relations, for way too many Years. 

[Guest Guest]

27 minutes ago, Erik62 said:

I am certainly not transphobic. I am however, phobic about groups who espouse intimidation & violence to make their point. As young children out of school we did not segregate however, at school we were segregated into "genders" in the interests of fair play. An easy solution to this socially destructive dilemma is to simply expand sports events into: Male, Female & transgender. Cost will be an irrelevancy when we take into consideration the gross waste of money that is spent by government and all relevant organisations that will be involved. This has to be sorted as it has caused to much angst within community relations, for way too many Years. 

What the fuck is @Erik6 talking about when he said "I am certainly not transphobic. I am however, phobic about groups who espouse intimidation & violence to make their point." The only people that have been espousing intimidation, violence, and inflammatory rhetoric are those on the far right. Once they have removed one minority you know they will come after other minorities. Gays and lesbian will be next, then the Jews... 1930's Germany all over again.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could live in a world where every member of the LGBTQIA+ community supported the rights of every other member of the community.

[Erik62]

2 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

What the fuck is @Erik6 talking about when he said "I am certainly not transphobic. I am however, phobic about groups who espouse intimidation & violence to make their point." The only people that have been espousing intimidation, violence, and inflammatory rhetoric are those on the far right. Once they have removed one minority you know they will come after other minorities. Gays and lesbian will be next, then the Jews... 1930's Germany all over again.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could live in a world where every member of the LGBTQIA+ community supported the rights of every other member of the community.

We do not have the right to impose on other groups, particularly when that group is by far in the majority (FEMALES) whose rights are being infringed upon. TRANS protesys have caused more violence, in Australia, than any other group in the last 5yrs. As I said, I am not transphobic but I have dead set disdain, even dislike, for ANY GROUP who uses violence, intimidation & public disruption. 

   The old  story that only LGB & every other letter have rights & biological genders must forego their rights for any minority, is way, way beyond belief & acceptance. Every person HAS THE RIGHT to feel comfortable in their chosen group & in society in general. Women have rights, tans have rights, as do men, disabled, religious, racial & all others & no specific group especially minorities have the right to infringe on any other group. Supporting rights of one group should not be at the loss of rights for another group. 

GET IT NOW!!!!!

[Erik62]

3 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

What the fuck is @Erik6 talking about when he said "I am certainly not transphobic. I am however, phobic about groups who espouse intimidation & violence to make their point." The only people that have been espousing intimidation, violence, and inflammatory rhetoric are those on the far right. Once they have removed one minority you know they will come after other minorities. Gays and lesbian will be next, then the Jews... 1930's Germany all over again.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could live in a world where every member of the LGBTQIA+ community supported the rights of every other member of the community.

And trans protests always involve some degree of violence (verbal or physical) or intimidation. How about we all call ourselves members of a single society where we are all equal. 

[tobetrained]

The problem with this topic and conversation is Trans is an idea and not biology. If that offends, please see HRC glossary
[think before following links] https://www.hrc.org/resources/glossary-of-terms

Competition in sport is typically, but not universally, driven by body size. Body size impact is independent of gender, but highly related given the happenstance of current-state evolution in human size. Here's an analysis the French RMES, Institut de Recherche bioMédicale et d'Epidémiologie du Sport published here by National Institute of Health: [think before following links] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3761733

It should be noted, it's not just gender. There are weight classes in combat sports for this very "body size" reason, i.e., heavyweight, featherweight, etc. in boxing.

Tangential point: In some species, the female is larger and more athletic (e.g. big cats) as they are the hunters while males scavenge.

As well, in non-movement sports there is little difference between gender, e.g., Archery:
[think before following links] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_archery

I would hope the Supreme Court keeps those born to a certain body types separate. If not, why would we have women's sports? Physical size is not an idea.

I understand @PozBearWI Battle of the Sexes comment. But it's modern equivalent just happened when the world's number one woman -- playing at her career peak -- played a man well past his prime and currently very lowly ranked. He beat her fairly easy.

Pre-match discussion
[think before following links] https://www.bbc.com/sport/tennis/articles/c1e4dej01yeo

Match results
[think before following links] https://www.bbc.com/sport/tennis/articles/cqlkqxnvdweo

This brings up a massive equal pay argument which I will not get into now.

[hntnhole]

18 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

Wouldn't it be nice if we could live in a world where every member of the LGBTQIA+ community supported the rights of every other member of the community

Since we're not offered the opportunity (yet, hopefully), here's a substitute 👍 for my "upvote".